PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i5-10400F vs Xeon E5-2640 v2 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i5-10400F vs Xeon E5-2640 v2: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +23.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,955 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
✅Delivers 4294.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 1.9 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2640 v2.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2640 v2, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2640 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (7,625 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($4,115 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Xeon E5-2640 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2640 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-10400F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 23.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-10400F is the stronger fit. You are getting 70.9% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i5-10400F is the better buy right now. Core i5-10400F comes in $3,955 cheaper on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $4,115 MSRP, and it still gives you a 23.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 4294.6% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 1.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-10400F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i5-10400F vs Xeon E5-2640 v2 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i5-10400F

The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

Xeon E5-2640 v2

The Xeon E5-2640 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,625 points. Launch price was $728.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2640 v2 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 2.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — a 52.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon E5-2640 v2's 7,625 — a 52.3% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 20 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2640 v2.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+72%	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+45%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	20 MB (total)+67%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
PassMark	13,029+71%	7,625
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — the Core i5-10400F supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2640 v2 supports up to 768 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2640 v2). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2640 v2) — the Xeon E5-2640 v2 offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Intel X79,Intel C602 (Xeon E5-2640 v2).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Socket	LGA1200	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+67%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	768 GB+500%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	40+150%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Xeon E5-2640 v2). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i5-10400F was priced at $160, while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 came in at $4115. On launch pricing ($160 vs $4115), Core i5-10400F was $3955 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 1.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — making the Core i5-10400F the 191.1% better value option.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon E5-2640 v2
MSRP	$160-96%	$4115
Performance per Dollar	81.4+4184%	1.9
Release Date	2020	2013

Search Core i5-10400F on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2640 v2 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.